Krajniw v Newman (No 2) [2015] FCA 673

Krajniw v Newman (No 2) [2015] FCA 673

The applicant’s statement of claim failed to plead material facts or specify conduct of any respondent said to be in breach of the EPBC Act, was littered with scandalous and irrelevant allegations, sought relief not available to the applicant, and did not relate to a species protected under the Act. Consequently, the applicant had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding, and summary judgment for the respondents was granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Application (originating) / Summary Judgment; Final Determination
Outcome
Proceeding dismissed; judgment for the respondents against the applicant.
Legal Topics
['summary Judgment' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'standing in Environmental Matters' 'threatened Species Under EPBC Act' 'abuse of Process']
['practice and Procedure' 'environmental Law'] ['summary Judgment' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'standing in Environmental Matters' 'threatened Species Under EPBC Act' 'abuse of Process']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application (originating) / Summary Judgment; Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant’s proceeding should be summarily dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success' 'Whether the statement of claim should be struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action' 'Whether the proceeding is an abuse of process']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant’s statement of claim failed to plead material facts or specify conduct of any respondent said to be in breach of the EPBC Act, was littered with scandalous and irrelevant allegations, sought relief not available to the applicant, and did not relate to a species protected under the Act. Consequently, the applicant had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding, and summary judgment for the respondents was granted.

Court Disposition

Proceeding dismissed; judgment for the respondents against the applicant.

Orders

  • ['Judgment entered for the respondents against the applicant under s 31A(2) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and r 26.01 of Federal Court Rules 2011.' "The applicant is to pay the first to sixteenth respondents' costs of and incidental to this application."]